Our data and benchmarking results are available at: http://lmexam.xlore.cn.

Computer programming is undergoing a true transformation driven by powerful new tools for automatic source code generation based on large language models. This transformation is also manifesting in introductory programming courses at universities around the world, generating an in-depth debate about how programming content should be taught, learned, and assessed in the context of generative artificial intelligence. This article aims, on the one hand, to review the most relevant studies on this issue, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages identified in the specialized literature. On the other hand, it proposes enriching teaching and learning methodologies by focusing on code comprehension and execution rather than on mere coding or program functionality. In particular, it advocates for the use of visual representations of code and visual simulations of its execution as effective tools for teaching, learning, and assessing programming, thus fostering a deeper understanding among students. Finally, the opinions of students who took the object-oriented programming course are presented to provide preliminary context supporting the incorporation of visual simulations in Java (or other languages) as part of the training process.

The research was partially supported by the Paul and Marcia Wythes Center on Contemporary China and Office of Population Research at Princeton University. We are grateful to Wen Liu, Gou Wu, and Dean Minello for their excellent research assistance. The ideas expressed herein are those of the authors. Abstract Liking it or not, ready or not, we are likely to enter a new phase of human history in which Artificial Intelligence (AI) will dominate economic production and social life - the AI Revolution. Before the actual arrival of the AI Revolution, it is time for us to speculate on how AI will impact the social world. In this article, we focus on the social impact of generative LLMbased AI (GELLMAI), discussing societal factors that contribute to its technological development and its potential roles in enhancing both between-country and within-country social inequality. There are good indications that the US and China will lead the field and will be the main competitors for domination of AI in the world. We conjecture the AI Revolution will likely give rise to a post-knowledge society in which knowledge per se will become less important than in today's world. Instead, individual relationships and social identity will become more important. With the advent of Generative Large Language Model (LLM)-based Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT from OpenAI and Bard from Google, it is natural to wonder about the social impact of this technology. In the remainder of this paper, we will refer to generative LLMbased AI simply as GELLMAI. The main objective of this paper is to explore, tentatively, the social impact of GELLMAI. While the question about the social impact of GELLMAI is undoubtedly important, any answers must be tentative and speculative at this point. We are still in the early stages of GELLMAI and may need to wait years, perhaps even decades, to fully understand its social implications. However, drawing from our experiences with past technologies in history, our current understanding of GELLMAI, empirical knowledge about the social world, and sociological reasoning, we can engage in preliminary and speculative discussions. We offer our account below. We believe that the social impact of GELLMAI is enormous, with the potential to revolutionize not only the production of goods and services but also to fundamentally alter the organization of human societies and the nature of daily life.

The characters used in modern countries are mainly divided into ideographic characters and phonetic characters, both of which have their advantages and disadvantages. Chinese is difficult to learn and easy to master, while English is easy to learn but has a large vocabulary. There is still no language that combines the advantages of both languages and has less memory capacity, can form words, and is easy to learn. Therefore, inventing new characters that can be combined and the popularization of deep knowledge, and reduce disputes through communication. Firstly, observe the advantages and disadvantages of Chinese and English, such as their vocabulary, information content, and ease of learning in deep scientific knowledge, and create a new writing system. Then, use comparative analysis to observe the total score of the new language. Through this article, it can be concluded that the new text combines the advantages of both pictographic and alphabetical writing: new characters that can be combined into words reduces the vocabulary that needs to be learned; Special prefixes allow beginners to quickly guess the approximate category and meaning of unseen words; New characters can enable humans to quickly learn more advanced knowledge.

Opinions in the scientific domain can be divergent, leading to controversy or consensus among reviewers. However, current opinion summarization datasets mostly focus on product review domains, which do not account for this variability under the assumption that the input opinions are non-controversial. To address this gap, we propose the task of scientific opinion summarization, where research paper reviews are synthesized into meta-reviews. To facilitate this task, we introduce a new ORSUM dataset covering 10,989 paper meta-reviews and 40,903 paper reviews from 39 conferences. Furthermore, we propose the Checklist-guided Iterative Introspection (CGI$^2$) approach, which breaks down the task into several stages and iteratively refines the summary under the guidance of questions from a checklist. We conclude that (1) human-written summaries are not always reliable since many do not follow the guidelines, and (2) the combination of task decomposition and iterative self-refinement shows promising discussion involvement ability and can be applied to other complex text generation using black-box LLM.

Numerous benchmarks have been established to assess the performance of foundation models on open-ended question answering, which serves as a comprehensive test of a model's ability to understand and generate language in a manner similar to humans. Most of these works focus on proposing new datasets, however, we see two main issues within previous benchmarking pipelines, namely testing leakage and evaluation automation. In this paper, we propose a novel benchmarking framework, Language-Model-as-an-Examiner, where the LM serves as a knowledgeable examiner that formulates questions based on its knowledge and evaluates responses in a reference-free manner. Our framework allows for effortless extensibility as various LMs can be adopted as the examiner, and the questions can be constantly updated given more diverse trigger topics. For a more comprehensive and equitable evaluation, we devise three strategies: (1) We instruct the LM examiner to generate questions across a multitude of domains to probe for a broad acquisition, and raise follow-up questions to engage in a more in-depth assessment. (2) Upon evaluation, the examiner combines both scoring and ranking measurements, providing a reliable result as it aligns closely with human annotations. (3) We additionally propose a decentralized Peer-examination method to address the biases in a single examiner. Our data and benchmarking results are available at: http://lmexam.xlore.cn.

Within the field of Requirements Engineering (RE), the increasing significance of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) in aligning AI-supported systems with user needs, societal expectations, and regulatory standards has garnered recognition. In general, explainability has emerged as an important non-functional requirement that impacts system quality. However, the supposed trade-off between explainability and performance challenges the presumed positive influence of explainability. If meeting the requirement of explainability entails a reduction in system performance, then careful consideration must be given to which of these quality aspects takes precedence and how to compromise between them. In this paper, we critically examine the alleged trade-off. We argue that it is best approached in a nuanced way that incorporates resource availability, domain characteristics, and considerations of risk. By providing a foundation for future research and best practices, this work aims to advance the field of RE for AI.